Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A. ABDUL HAKHIM, J
PEEKKARA VEETIL KUNHIRAMAN(DIED,LHRS IMPLEADED) – Appellant
Versus
THEKKEVEETIL NARAYANAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff claims kuzhikanam right over property. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant argues possession based on purchase certificate. (Para 3 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court analyzes evidence and finds lack of proof for plaintiff's claim. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. court dismisses appeal, affirming first appellate court's decision. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The plaintiff in a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction is the appellant. The plaint schedule property originally is shown as 85 cents of land in R.S.No.181/2 of Perole village. After the filing of the Ext.C1 Commission Report and Ext.C1(a) Plan, the extent was amended as 79.388 cents of land. Both sides admit that the Jenmom right of the plaint schedule property belonged to Vettakkorumakan Devaswom.
2. The plaintiff claimed that the plaintiff obtained kuzhikanam right over the plaint schedule property 50 years back. The defendant obtained Purchase Certificate with respect to an extent of 2 Acre 50 cents of land including the plaint schedule property as per order in I.A.No.10919/75. Immediately upon knowing the issuance of the Purchase Certificate, the plaintiff filed an Appeal before the appellate a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
